Andrews v. Boykin

Summary

The Georgia Supreme Court held that a divorce settlement agreement and decree did not transfer title to real property because the property was not specifically described, and the documents were recorded in the wrong county. The court reversed and remanded the quiet-title action because the special master did not adequately explain the legal basis for awarding the property to Melvin Boykin, including whether adverse possession or another theory applied.

Holdings

1. A divorce decree and incorporated settlement agreement do not divest a party of an interest in real property unless the property is specifically described and disposed of in the decree. Because the property was not specifically described, title remained in Raymond Boykin, Sr. and Naomi Boykin as tenants in common after the divorce.
2. Recording the settlement agreement and divorce decree in the deed records of a county other than the county in which the property lies does not establish an intent to transfer that property.
3. The judgment could not stand because the special master's report did not identify the legal theory on which Melvin Boykin was awarded title or explain how the findings supported the conclusion. The case had to be remanded for consideration of adverse possession and any other theories not addressed in the report and trial court's order.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the separation agreement and divorce decree transferred or divested Naomi Boykin's interest in the property when neither document specifically described the property.
2. Whether recording the separation agreement and divorce decree in the deed records of a county other than the county where the property was located demonstrated an intent to transfer the property.
3. Whether the special master's report adequately supported the conclusion that Melvin Boykin held title, including whether the case required consideration of adverse possession or other legal theories.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded